What do you believe?

Alright, I see most of you have said that if the child will be mentally challenged should it be kept. I say yes. Let the child live a happy life, mentally retarded or otherwise. At least they will see the days, weeks, months, and maybe even years go by before they die. I like the old saying, "ignorance is a bliss", and the way I see it, that's how mentally challenged people are. They may not function as well as others but at least they are happy to be alive.

I know I didn't mention this before but if y'all are going to have sex, shouldn't contraception be considered? Now I'm catholic and I don't believe in it but I mean, if you're having sex, shouldn't you consider it?

getting back on track. Like most have said, it should be viewed as a case by case thing. I don't think that abortion should be used as a form of BC. it's sickening and sad. I'm just going to ask, knowing the vast majority are males, do you know what the procedure of an abortion is like? If not, I'll suggest this site: www.abortionfacts.comI have gone there many times and it has both views even though the most I have seen have been more of a prolife stand point. Anyways it's a good site for both parties and it even has testimonies and such. I'm not trying to anger anyone. (I'm sorry if I'm apologizing so much, I'm so used to getting bashed on facebook >.<)

"Deserve abortions? What the hell does that mean? Nobody "deserves" an abortion any more than someone else. As long as you're a paying customer, you deserve it just as much as anyone else."

I think what he means is that if you're out having sex and you're constantly getting prego and getting abortions then you don't deserve one for the fact that you made the choice to have sex, now you need to live with the consequence. (even though children are NOT a consequence, choice, or punishment, they are more of a blessing. Hence why we should wait until marriage.)

I am Pro-Choice. Deceiving, I know. You see, I believe that the choice should be made before you go about having sex. If you choose to have sex, then you have chosen to potentially bear children. Thus, I believe that abortion should be something you have to get approved in a court, so that it is only used in cases of rape or when medical complications would be caused by the birth.

You see, while everyone likes to tout around the issue of "what if the mother would die?" or "what if it was rape?" the fact remains that a VAST majority of abortions are not for these reasons. You see, about 8% of all abortions in the United States are because of these justifiable cuases, like rape or medical complications. The other 92% are because of reasons like "not ready to have children" or "can't afford to have children" or "partner doesn't want children" or "others don't want me to have children" or "children will disrupt education/career plans" or "have too many children" and such bullshit. That's right. Ninety fucking two percent of abortions are hiding behind eight percent of abortions as justification.

KristallNacht wrote:i still don't see the issue with having sex and not wanting kids

no one is saying that you can't have sex and not want kids. This isn't the issue. If you wanna have sex by all means, be my guest. What we are debating is the fact that if you choose to have sex, make sure you are ready for all the potenial things that could happen to you. This debate is about abortion, not sex. Sex has a big part in baby making of course lol. But I'm just going to say that if you can't debate about the subject then please, don't post. (not trying to be mean I just like to stay on topic)

KristallNacht wrote:whats the punishment you're gonna give the mother when she gets an abortion?

Now this is getting into: "Is it a medical reason or a 'just because I can' reason?"

in a medical situation where the life of both mother and child are at risk, then there should be no punishment besides a fine for the extra procedure done (if anyone has anything to add, by all means do)

in the "just because I can" situation there should be a large fine and depending on the term of the abortion, some sort of jail time and a sex ed class. (again, any changes or adds, please, lemme know)

I view the whole "potential" case not as one of simply another potential human being, but the small chance that maybe they will be someone of importance. One way to look at it would be "what if so-and-so were never born?"

Of course, its hard to say if such a case would have a positive or negative impact, so it's hard to argue it to begin with.

Honestly though, if anything bothers me it's the how some people are so nonchalant about getting abortions. I thus find myself having a view very similar to Rot's.

_________________I AM THE LAW[00:17:22] @ KrAzY : new law.[00:17:28] @ KrAzY : the law can now be a person.[00:17:28] @ XNate02 : The Law, can only be The Law.[00:17:32] @ Gauz : I'd kick everyone....[00:17:37] @ KrAzY : and that person is seath[00:17:39] @ kasrkin seath : YES------------------------------------------[02:22:43] @ KrAzY : the reason we all come to TCF is because Seath is too Lord Pheonix damn sexy to stop.

kasrkin seath wrote:I view the whole "potential" case not as one of simply another potential human being, but the small chance that maybe they will be someone of importance. One way to look at it would be "what if so-and-so were never born?"

What if Obama's parents had never met, or had met 15 minutes later under severely different circumstances, such as Mr. Obama spilling his drink on Mrs. Obama and she never liked him? Obama never would have been born, correct?

There is potential for greatness and consquences exist in every moment of your life, every decision you make could have massive effects later on and most will. So i ask the question, what the FUCK does that have to do with a question of MORALS!?!?!?

TNine wrote: If destroying something with the potential to live is murder/death, don't girls commit it every month (menstruation) and guys every time they jack off (alongside the kitten)? Of course not!

Of course not, genius. Because a lone egg and lone (well, maybe not lone) sperm does not a human make. It's when they combine that the ball gets rolling.

Ringleader wrote:Eugenics by abortion...

It sounds like this guy thinks everyone that is against pro-life are creating some kind of "super-race" of non-retarded people... How stupid can people get to think something like this. I personally think it is inhumane to allow someone to live that is not able to experience life to the fullest because of factors out of their power, and inhibitors they can never overcome.

Sorry, man, but eugenics doesn't necessarily mean the creation of a Master Race. It entails the elimination of diseased factors within a population.

And if we're talking about people who are not able to experience life to the fullest because of factors outside of their power, let's start killing the triple amputees and the critical cancer patients, rather than documenting their heroic perseverance.

Ringleader wrote:If it is a religious matter, then it is a religious matter and should not be applied to our scientific ethical standards. Does that mean contraceptives should also be illegalized? after all, when used, they rob the world from human potential right? In fact, us, not, reproducing at optimal capacity now is robbing the world of 'human potential'.

You could argue that. I won't.

Ringleader wrote:What the hell is 'human potential' anyway? The capacity for someone to do work!? Knowing how many people end up being a drag on society, wouldn't the concept of human potential be better served if we eliminated all people in our society with no practical application? Soylent Green anyone?

Heh, I'll have to look that movie up.

But I've got a question. If we need to get rid of the people who are a drag on society, why do it at birth? It's such a hit-and-miss process: We might be killing the guys who figure out how to get fusion working. Why not kill off people who can only do menial/service work at age 20, 30, and 40? They're a drag on society.

What about the potential to just be there? To contribute to society, to interact with other people? If human potential is just the capacity to do work, then I advocate the systemic extermination of the menial classes who can be replaced with machines, followed by all other walks of life which can be replaced by computers and artificial intelligence.

Ringleader wrote:No but seriously, human potential is such a borked concept to build our ethical code of conduct around, because there are no historical examples to substantiate it in the least. The world isn't going to be any better if there are more people in it, and the problems that such a grossly overpopulated world will face will be insurmountable.

Here's a hint, bucko: social pressures to have fewer children are reducing the population faster than abortion alone will ever hope to.

Ringleader wrote:It's hard to empathize with people in a situation where they would even consider removing thier own offspring from existence, but you think they wouldnt do it without a good reason right?

You've gone out and met the common American, right?

Ringleader wrote:I mean, knowing some of the really F#@&ed up stuff that happens in the world, you think there would be somewhere where not having children grow up in it, will actually be ethically correct. Like, take into consideration the AIDS epidemic in Africa, if a baby is going to be born with a deliberating/crippling disease, in a part of the world where people are butchering each other like animals, then maybe, just maybe, it would be better to remove the potential sufferer from existence before he actually exists, because there is no human potentil in these settings, except for the unfourtuante soul to become some, AIDS infected warriorlord.

Warlord.And you're hiding behind that. Should that reason apply to Americans, who are also living in bombed-out warlord-ravaged ghettos where everyone and his dog can get an AK-47 for the price of a live chicken? /Sarcasm

Ringleader wrote:Rape and pregnancies that would kill the mother are also examples of how the rationalization of pro-life is highly subject to interpretation.

As Rotaretilbo so kindly pointed out, those are a small minority.

Ringleader wrote:Yeah, there is some unhealthy obsession with filling the world with as many people as possible without taking into consideration what will happen to our environment and livelihood. Look what is happening in India now... How are they going to feed, educate, and employ such a massively overpopulated nation?

Yeah, because America is one heartbeat away from having three times the population and half the land, hein?

Ringleader wrote:Overpopulation is going to destroy our livelihood because people are not biologically wired to be crammed into existence.

True, but abortion is hardly going to solve that problem.

Ringleader wrote:

now, in the case of "I have so much sex and and now i'm pregnant, OOPS!" I do not believe those ditsy idiots should be able to abort.

Well, I think that if that were the case, it is not likely the children would have a very good development stage. I think it should be more about what will happen to the children, instead of the foolishness of the parents.

I think her point was, we're aborting the wrong person. If a person like that has an abortion, she should leave some other parts behind at the clinic.

The male too, when we track him down.

KristallNacht wrote:i still don't see the issue with having sex and not wanting kids

KrAzY wrote:adoption still has the problem of putting kids into our already overpopulated society

overpopulation is an issue, a big one at that... in 50 years at this rate things are going to get very uncomfterable in places that didn't start trying to lessen the problem early.

you can't treat symptoms, you have to sometimes treat the disease.

before there was a big war less than every 100 years that helped keep our population in check, there will never be a large scale war like that again after the invention of the Nuke... so we need to start on population control... NOW

abortions wouldn't do much to make a dent in that... but kids being raised badly by families who did not want them is part of the self perpetuating problem of poverty in this country

I do agree with adoptions... It would only become a problem when EVERY mother is forced to have their child and hundreds of thousands of kids per year start getting dumped into the adoption system

Actually, while the world population continues to skyrocket, this growth is contained almost entirely within developing countries, while the top 13 percent of the worlds population (Europe and Anglo America) has come to a total halt, and in many cases reversal. While the United States is currently maintaining a near zero growth rate, some parts of Europe and Japan have already experienced negative growth. Overpopulation is not an issue at all, in fact I predict that in the future we will have a huge amount of dependents with a inadequate work force to support them. If we are to protect our interests as a nation, population control should be the last of our worries.

kasrkin seath wrote:I view the whole "potential" case not as one of simply another potential human being, but the small chance that maybe they will be someone of importance. One way to look at it would be "what if so-and-so were never born?"

What if Obama's parents had never met, or had met 15 minutes later under severely different circumstances, such as Mr. Obama spilling his drink on Mrs. Obama and she never liked him? Obama never would have been born, correct?

There is potential for greatness and consquences exist in every moment of your life, every decision you make could have massive effects later on and most will. So i ask the question, what the FUCK does that have to do with a question of MORALS!?!?!?

umm.... what?

_________________I AM THE LAW[00:17:22] @ KrAzY : new law.[00:17:28] @ KrAzY : the law can now be a person.[00:17:28] @ XNate02 : The Law, can only be The Law.[00:17:32] @ Gauz : I'd kick everyone....[00:17:37] @ KrAzY : and that person is seath[00:17:39] @ kasrkin seath : YES------------------------------------------[02:22:43] @ KrAzY : the reason we all come to TCF is because Seath is too Lord Pheonix damn sexy to stop.

Rasq'uire'laskar wrote:Because a lone egg and lone (well, maybe not lone) sperm does not a human make.

Neither does an aborted fetus, genius.

If the first instance of the unique genetic material that makes up a human isn't a satifactory milestone of humanity, what possible measure can you use? Honest question, as i've never gotten a satisfatory answer.

kasrkin seath wrote:I view the whole "potential" case not as one of simply another potential human being, but the small chance that maybe they will be someone of importance. One way to look at it would be "what if so-and-so were never born?"

What if Obama's parents had never met, or had met 15 minutes later under severely different circumstances, such as Mr. Obama spilling his drink on Mrs. Obama and she never liked him? Obama never would have been born, correct?

There is potential for greatness and consquences exist in every moment of your life, every decision you make could have massive effects later on and most will. So i ask the question, what the FUCK does that have to do with a question of MORALS!?!?!?

umm.... what?

You said that potential greatness was a reason against abortion. I pointed out that any and every moment of your life has potential for greatness, so that doesn't fly.

kasrkin seath wrote:I view the whole "potential" case not as one of simply another potential human being, but the small chance that maybe they will be someone of importance. One way to look at it would be "what if so-and-so were never born?"

What if Obama's parents had never met, or had met 15 minutes later under severely different circumstances, such as Mr. Obama spilling his drink on Mrs. Obama and she never liked him? Obama never would have been born, correct?

There is potential for greatness and consquences exist in every moment of your life, every decision you make could have massive effects later on and most will. So i ask the question, what the FUCK does that have to do with a question of MORALS!?!?!?

umm.... what?

You said that potential greatness was a reason against abortion. I pointed out that any and every moment of your life has potential for greatness, so that doesn't fly.

As usual, 2% of the poll has been lost to flaming.

If the life doesn't exist then there is no potential for greatness? Im honestly not following that line of logic.You didn't even completely read everything I said either did you? I went so far as to say that it cant be used as a main arguing point, yet you still wish to argue with me for the hell of it.

_________________I AM THE LAW[00:17:22] @ KrAzY : new law.[00:17:28] @ KrAzY : the law can now be a person.[00:17:28] @ XNate02 : The Law, can only be The Law.[00:17:32] @ Gauz : I'd kick everyone....[00:17:37] @ KrAzY : and that person is seath[00:17:39] @ kasrkin seath : YES------------------------------------------[02:22:43] @ KrAzY : the reason we all come to TCF is because Seath is too Lord Pheonix damn sexy to stop.

Rasq'uire'laskar wrote:Because a lone egg and lone (well, maybe not lone) sperm does not a human make.

Neither does an aborted fetus, genius.

If the first instance of the unique genetic material that makes up a human isn't a satifactory milestone of humanity, what possible measure can you use? Honest question, as i've never gotten a satisfatory answer.

I believe that the moment of conception is the creation of a conscious mind. Which is an accumulation that has no exact beginning or end, ironically.

kasrkin seath wrote:I view the whole "potential" case not as one of simply another potential human being, but the small chance that maybe they will be someone of importance. One way to look at it would be "what if so-and-so were never born?"

What if Obama's parents had never met, or had met 15 minutes later under severely different circumstances, such as Mr. Obama spilling his drink on Mrs. Obama and she never liked him? Obama never would have been born, correct?

There is potential for greatness and consquences exist in every moment of your life, every decision you make could have massive effects later on and most will. So i ask the question, what the FUCK does that have to do with a question of MORALS!?!?!?

There's still a difference between never conceiving a child in the first place, and removing one after conception.

Just because you yourself have no moral compass (or a simply undernourished sense of morality) does not mean that other people do not consider abortion to be a moral issue. Whether or not you consider the fetus to be alive is one thing, but saying that there is no moral factor at all in deciding whether or not to prevent a life (no matter what the circumstances) is just plain false.

kasrkin seath wrote:I view the whole "potential" case not as one of simply another potential human being, but the small chance that maybe they will be someone of importance. One way to look at it would be "what if so-and-so were never born?"

What if Obama's parents had never met, or had met 15 minutes later under severely different circumstances, such as Mr. Obama spilling his drink on Mrs. Obama and she never liked him? Obama never would have been born, correct?

There is potential for greatness and consquences exist in every moment of your life, every decision you make could have massive effects later on and most will. So i ask the question, what the FUCK does that have to do with a question of MORALS!?!?!?

There's still a difference between never conceiving a child in the first place, and removing one after conception.

Just because you yourself have no moral compass (or a simply undernourished sense of morality) does not mean that other people do not consider abortion to be a moral issue. Whether or not you consider the fetus to be alive is one thing, but saying that there is no moral factor at all in deciding whether or not to prevent a life (no matter what the circumstances) is just plain false.

kasrkin seath wrote:I view the whole "potential" case not as one of simply another potential human being, but the small chance that maybe they will be someone of importance. One way to look at it would be "what if so-and-so were never born?"

What if Obama's parents had never met, or had met 15 minutes later under severely different circumstances, such as Mr. Obama spilling his drink on Mrs. Obama and she never liked him? Obama never would have been born, correct?

There is potential for greatness and consquences exist in every moment of your life, every decision you make could have massive effects later on and most will. So i ask the question, what the FUCK does that have to do with a question of MORALS!?!?!?

There's still a difference between never conceiving a child in the first place, and removing one after conception.

Just because you yourself have no moral compass (or a simply undernourished sense of morality) does not mean that other people do not consider abortion to be a moral issue. Whether or not you consider the fetus to be alive is one thing, but saying that there is no moral factor at all in deciding whether or not to prevent a life (no matter what the circumstances) is just plain false.

Edit: While i'm at it:[urlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem[/url]

You still failed to counter his argument, lol.

I think the whole thing really boils down to what someone considers human.

_________________I AM THE LAW[00:17:22] @ KrAzY : new law.[00:17:28] @ KrAzY : the law can now be a person.[00:17:28] @ XNate02 : The Law, can only be The Law.[00:17:32] @ Gauz : I'd kick everyone....[00:17:37] @ KrAzY : and that person is seath[00:17:39] @ kasrkin seath : YES------------------------------------------[02:22:43] @ KrAzY : the reason we all come to TCF is because Seath is too Lord Pheonix damn sexy to stop.

While I don't like the thought of a child being denied a life, I still think it's the choice of the parent. If someones getting an abortion for any reason, it's probably the best thing. If you want to get an abortion, then that means you do not want to be a parent. I don't like the idea of someone giving birth to a child that they don't want, and could possibly end up abusing/neglecting, i'ts not right imo. I also don't think they should give birth then give to adoption, or to some other family, no... there are enough kids that need to be adopted.

Now, about the debate of when does human life begin?, there are multiple ways to look at it. Civ believes in human life right when the "child" is genetically diverse. Which takes place after fertilization.

Some people think "life" begins when the embryo starts forming, other when the nerveous forms, some think when the fetus has thought/can sustain life on it's own... yadda yadda yadda. Me personally, I don't really think about it too much, so I just go with the legal abortion... limit/time/date/thing.

kasrkin seath wrote:I view the whole "potential" case not as one of simply another potential human being, but the small chance that maybe they will be someone of importance. One way to look at it would be "what if so-and-so were never born?"

What if Obama's parents had never met, or had met 15 minutes later under severely different circumstances, such as Mr. Obama spilling his drink on Mrs. Obama and she never liked him? Obama never would have been born, correct?

There is potential for greatness and consquences exist in every moment of your life, every decision you make could have massive effects later on and most will. So i ask the question, what the FUCK does that have to do with a question of MORALS!?!?!?

There's still a difference between never conceiving a child in the first place, and removing one after conception.

Just because you yourself have no moral compass (or a simply undernourished sense of morality) does not mean that other people do not consider abortion to be a moral issue. Whether or not you consider the fetus to be alive is one thing, but saying that there is no moral factor at all in deciding whether or not to prevent a life (no matter what the circumstances) is just plain false.